1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to golf clubs, specifically to a putter with improved weight distribution and attendant other advantages.
2. Description of Prior Art
From the grass around the fringe of a putting green many professionals in the game of golf will use a sand wedge, striking the middle of the ball with the bottom edge of the club. This is called "blading" the ball, and it has two advantages. First, it lessens the chance of the club getting hung up in the grass during the stroke because the club is raised up so that the bottom edge is at the level of the center of the ball. Second, it provides a very solid hit because much of the weight of a sand wedge is concentrated just back of the front edge that strikes the ball at the exact height of its center. This is a shot that requires considerable skill, and it is not one that could normally be used by the average golfer with much success. However, a putter head can be designed that will provide this same very solid feeling type of shot while requiring no more skill than would be required with any other kind of putter head.
Specifically, the club is designed so that most of the weight of the club, not the center of weight, but the weight itself, is concentrated, during the stroke, about a horizontal plane through the center of the ball. Light and thin metal forms the face and sole of the club, giving it a more or less conventional exterior configuration while having a minimal effect on the favorable weight distribution. In other words, this is a putter designed to "blade" the ball in a very controlled fashion, and it is quite different from prior club design art where almost every other conceivable weight distribution possibility has been proposed. This design does indeed provide a very solid feeling shot. The advantage is most noticeable on fast, closely mown, greens such as are found at major professional tournaments. Feel is extremely important in good shot making. Thus, in the very crowded field of putter design a significant improvement in the art is achieved.
In spite of the many patents in this field, an exhaustive search revealed nothing similar to the present invention. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,058,895 Igarashi (1991) discloses a putter with toe, heel, and back weighting disposed above its midline center of gravity; that is, above a horizontal plane through the center of the ball. However, it is the center of weight, not the weight itself, that is disposed above the midline. This is by no means the same improvement as that claimed for the present invention. Further explanation of this will be given in reference to the drawings herein. U.S. Pat. No. 4,999,000 Finney (1991) concerns a putter with high polar moment of inertia about a vertical axis, and this patent covers extensively the prior art in putter design, including the use of exotic metals to provide incremental improvements in weight and balance of a club head, yet it reveals nothing comparable to the present invention.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,979,744 Alcala (1990) and U.S. Pat. No. 4,915,385 Anderson (1990) both reveal putter head designs emphasizing the importance of weight and balance and eye appeal, yet neither will produce the solid feel and click of the present design which puts the bulk of the weight squarely behind the center of the ball. Further, when viewed from the putter's position over the ball they display many convoluted surfaces whereas the putter head of this invention is elegantly simple, displaying perfectly straight front and back faces to align perpendicular to the desired direction of ball flight, straight ends that align parallel to that direction, and a perfectly planar top surface with nothing to distract the eye.
Skelly in U.S. Pat. No. 4,199,144 (1980) discloses a putter head design with a rock hard plastic face which purportedly delivers a needed stronger force against the ball than that of a same-applied stroke of a conventional putter; however this putter has most of its weight at the sole of the club, not at the level of the center of the ball, and consequently, for the same stroke, it will not deliver as strong a force as the putter head of the present invention. Reuter in U.S. Pat. No. 3,652,093 (1972) describes a putter head design that puts the center of weight more directly behind the ball through the use of hollow toe and heel spaces, just the opposite of the more common toe and heel weighting. This design is supposedly better from just off the green, loft being designed into the club head. But here again, it is the center of weight that is behind the ball, the weight itself is not distributed around a horizontal plane through the belly of the ball, quite different from the present invention.
From the above, and from even the briefest survey of the art of putter head design, it is clear that what may appear to be very small improvements may be quite significant. Much is made of improved polar moment of inertia about a vertical axis achieved through the use of toe and heel weighting, and though the theory behind this idea sounds plausible, there is little real evidence that it will significantly improve a mis-hit putt. Be this as it may, the Ping series of putters which feature this type of weighting have been an outstanding commercial success, probably outselling any other putter ever made. Putting is such a psychological thing, that if the golfer thinks that one putter is better than another, he will undoubtably use it better. The putter design of the present invention has a real advantage over other putters, but perhaps just as important, it is an advantage that will be quite understandable to almost all experienced golfers, inspiring confidence in their ability to use the putter and thus making it more effective still. Further advantages related to the producibility of the putter will be discussed later.